Dataset Information

Liothyronine and Desiccated Thyroid Extract in the Treatment of Hypothyroidism.

ABSTRACT: Background: The basis for the treatment of hypothyroidism with levothyroxine (LT4) is that humans activate T4 to triiodothyronine (T3). Thus, while normalizing serum thyrotropin (TSH), LT4 doses should also restore the body's reservoir of T3. However, there is evidence that T3 is not fully restored in LT4-treated patients. Summary: For patients who remain symptomatic on LT4 therapy, clinical guidelines recommend, on a trial basis, therapy with LT4+LT3. Reducing the LT4 dose by 25 mcg/day and adding 2.5-7.5 mcg liothyronine (LT3) once or twice a day is an appropriate starting point. Transient episodes of hypertriiodothyroninemia with these doses of LT4 and LT3 are unlikely to go above the reference range and have not been associated with adverse drug reactions. Trials following almost a 1000 patients for almost 1 year indicate that similar to LT4, therapy with LT4+LT3 can restore euthyroidism while maintaining a normal serum TSH. An observational study of 400 patients with a mean follow-up of ∼9 years did not indicate increased mortality or morbidity risk due to cardiovascular disease, atrial fibrillation, or fractures after adjusting for age when compared with patients taking only LT4. Desiccated thyroid extract (DTE) is a form of combination therapy in which the LT4/LT3 ratio is ∼4:1; the mean daily dose of DTE needed to normalize serum TSH contains ∼11 mcg T3, but some patients may require higher doses. The DTE remains outside formal FDA oversight, and consistency of T4 and T3 contents is monitored by the manufacturers only. Conclusions: Newly diagnosed hypothyroid patients should be treated with LT4. A trial of combination therapy with LT4+LT3 can be considered for those patients who have unambiguously not benefited from LT4.

SUBMITTER: Idrees T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7640752 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectives: It is unclear why many patients with hypothyroidism prefer the use of desiccated thyroid extract (DTE) as a thyroid hormone replacement formulation over levothyroxine (LT4) treatment, as recommended by clinical practice guidelines. We analyzed patient-reported information from patient online forums to better understand patient preferences for and attitudes toward the use of DTE to treat hypothyroidism. Materials and Methods: We conducted a mixed-methods study by evaluating the content of online posts from three popular hypothyroidism forums from patients currently taking DTE (n = 673). From these posts, we extracted descriptive information on patient demographics and clinical characteristics and qualitatively analyzed posts' content to explore patient perceptions on DTE and other therapies further. Results: Nearly half (46%) of the patients reported that a clinician initially drove their interest in trying DTE. Patients described many reasons for switching from a previous therapeutic approach to DTE, including lack of improvement in hypothyroidism-related symptoms (58%) and the development of side effects (22%). The majority of patients described DTE as moderately to majorly effective overall (81%) and more effective than the previous therapy (77%). The most frequently described benefits associated with DTE use were an improvement in symptoms (56%) and a change in overall well-being (34%). One-fifth of patients described side effects related to the use of DTE. Qualitative analysis of posts' content supported these findings and raised additional issues around the need for individualizing therapy approaches for hypothyroidism (e.g., a sense of each patient has different needs), as well as difficulties obtaining DTE (e.g., issues with pharmacy availability). Conclusions: Lack of individualized treatment and a feeling of not been listened to were recurrent themes among DTE users. A subset of patients may prefer DTE to LT4 for many reasons, including perceived better effectiveness and improved overall well-being, despite the risks associated with DTE.

Project description:Background: Fourteen clinical trials have not shown a consistent benefit of combination therapy with levothyroxine (LT4) and liothyronine (LT3). Despite the publication of these trials, combination therapy is widely used and patients reporting benefit continue to generate patient and physician interest in this area. Recent scientific developments may provide insight into this inconsistency and guide future studies. Methods: The American Thyroid Association (ATA), British Thyroid Association (BTA), and European Thyroid Association (ETA) held a joint conference on November 3, 2019 (live-streamed between Chicago and London) to review new basic science and clinical evidence regarding combination therapy with presentations and input from 12 content experts. After the presentations, the material was synthesized and used to develop Summary Statements of the current state of knowledge. After review and revision of the material and Summary Statements, there was agreement that there was equipoise for a new clinical trial of combination therapy. Consensus Statements encapsulating the implications of the material discussed with respect to the design of future clinical trials of LT4/LT3 combination therapy were generated. Authors voted upon the Consensus Statements. Iterative changes were made in several rounds of voting and after comments from ATA/BTA/ETA members. Results: Of 34 Consensus Statements available for voting, 28 received at least 75% agreement, with 13 receiving 100% agreement. Those with 100% agreement included studies being powered to study the effect of deiodinase and thyroid hormone transporter polymorphisms on study outcomes, inclusion of patients dissatisfied with their current therapy and requiring at least 1.2 μg/kg of LT4 daily, use of twice daily LT3 or preferably a slow-release preparation if available, use of patient-reported outcomes as a primary outcome (measured by a tool with both relevant content validity and responsiveness) and patient preference as a secondary outcome, and utilization of a randomized placebo-controlled adequately powered double-blinded parallel design. The remaining statements are presented as potential additional considerations. Discussion: This article summarizes the areas discussed and presents Consensus Statements to guide development of future clinical trials of LT4/LT3 combination therapy. The results of such redesigned trials are expected to be of benefit to patients and of value to inform future thyroid hormone replacement clinical practice guidelines treatment recommendations.

Project description:BackgroundFourteen clinical trials have not shown a consistent benefit of combination therapy with levothyroxine (LT4) and liothyronine (LT3). Despite the publication of these trials, combination therapy is widely used and patients reporting benefit continue to generate patient and physician interest in this area. Recent scientific developments may provide insight into this inconsistency and guide future studies.MethodsThe American Thyroid Association (ATA), British Thyroid Association (BTA), and European Thyroid Association (ETA) held a joint conference on November 3, 2019 (live-streamed between Chicago and London) to review new basic science and clinical evidence regarding combination therapy with presentations and input from 12 content experts. After the presentations, the material was synthesized and used to develop Summary Statements of the current state of knowledge. After review and revision of the material and Summary Statements, there was agreement that there was equipoise for a new clinical trial of combination therapy. Consensus Statements encapsulating the implications of the material discussed with respect to the design of future clinical trials of LT4/LT3 combination therapy were generated. Authors voted upon the Consensus Statements. Iterative changes were made in several rounds of voting and after comments from ATA/BTA/ETA members.ResultsOf 34 Consensus Statements available for voting, 28 received at least 75% agreement, with 13 receiving 100% agreement. Those with 100% agreement included studies being powered to study the effect of deiodinase and thyroid hormone transporter polymorphisms on study outcomes, inclusion of patients dissatisfied with their current therapy and requiring at least 1.2 µg/kg of LT4 daily, use of twice daily LT3 or preferably a slow-release preparation if available, use of patient-reported outcomes as a primary outcome (measured by a tool with both relevant content validity and responsiveness) and patient preference as a secondary outcome, and utilization of a randomized placebo-controlled adequately powered double-blinded parallel design. The remaining statements are presented as potential additional considerations.DiscussionThis article summarizes the areas discussed and presents Consensus Statements to guide development of future clinical trials of LT4/LT3 combination therapy. The results of such redesigned trials are expected to be of benefit to patients and of value to inform future thyroid hormone replacement clinical practice guidelines treatment recommendations.

Project description:Abstract Background Liothyronine (LT3) is a substitute for levothyroxine (LT4) for thyroid cancer patients during the preparation for nuclear medicine procedures, and there is renewed interest in its use in combination with LT4 in patients who do not respond to the standard treatment. This therapy is commonly done on fixed doses potentially resulting in supraphysiologic levels of T3. A good understanding of the LT3 pharmacokinetics (PK) is necessary to design combination treatment schemes able to maintain serum T3 levels within normal range, but data on the PK of LT3 are conflicting. Here we present a study designed to characterize the PK of LT3 in patients devoid of endogenous thyroid hormone production, not receiving LT4. Methods We performed an open label PK study in patients undergoing thyroid hormone withdrawal in preparation for nuclear medicine procedures for the evaluation and treatment of follicular-derived thyroid cancer (Clinicaltrials.gov ID NCT01441154). LT3 was substituted for LT4 at 1:3 mcg/mcg dosage ratio thrice daily for at least thirty days. PK of single dose LT3 and terminal elimination were assessed over eleven days and first dose PK was offered following the nuclear medicine procedures. Results Fourteen patients (7 males, 7 females) age 48.5±16.0 years completed the study. The LT3 daily dose was 53.7±12.3 (0.74±0.1 mcg/Kg). PK studies performed with the morning dose (18.8±4.4 mcg), indicate a Cmax of 320±60 ng/dl, significantly above the upper limit (90-215). Tmax was 1.8±0.5 hours and two distinct phases of linear elimination with a fast distribution phase and slow elimination phases with half-lives of 1.2 hours and 29.9 hours were identified, supporting a two-compartment model. PK modeling for a 50 mcg LT3 total dose predicted that while the mean T3 levels would not significantly differ among single, twice, or thrice daily administration regimens, the variance would differ dramatically, 213.5±126 vs. 214.5±61 vs. 214.5±35 ng/dl, single, twice and thrice daily administration, respectively. We next performed a PK modeling for LT3/LT4 combination therapy, twice daily administration. The results indicate that low dose LT3 (up to 0.07 mcg/kg twice daily) in combination with LT4 can predictably increase the serum T3 concentration without significant peaks above the normal range. Conclusions The PK of LT3 is well described by a two-compartment model that assumes elimination only from the sampling compartment, with a rapid distribution phase and a slow elimination phase. This information will contribute to design therapeutic strategies for LT3/LT4 combination therapy directed to maintain stable T3 serum levels. Unless otherwise noted, all abstracts presented at ENDO are embargoed until the date and time of presentation. For oral presentations, the abstracts are embargoed until the session begins. Abstracts presented at a news conference are embargoed until the date and time of the news conference. The Endocrine Society reserves the right to lift the embargo on specific abstracts that are selected for promotion prior to or during ENDO.

Project description:BackgroundA number of recent advances in our understanding of thyroid physiology may shed light on why some patients feel unwell while taking levothyroxine monotherapy. The purpose of this task force was to review the goals of levothyroxine therapy, the optimal prescription of conventional levothyroxine therapy, the sources of dissatisfaction with levothyroxine therapy, the evidence on treatment alternatives, and the relevant knowledge gaps. We wished to determine whether there are sufficient new data generated by well-designed studies to provide reason to pursue such therapies and change the current standard of care. This document is intended to inform clinical decision-making on thyroid hormone replacement therapy; it is not a replacement for individualized clinical judgment.MethodsTask force members identified 24 questions relevant to the treatment of hypothyroidism. The clinical literature relating to each question was then reviewed. Clinical reviews were supplemented, when relevant, with related mechanistic and bench research literature reviews, performed by our team of translational scientists. Ethics reviews were provided, when relevant, by a bioethicist. The responses to questions were formatted, when possible, in the form of a formal clinical recommendation statement. When responses were not suitable for a formal clinical recommendation, a summary response statement without a formal clinical recommendation was developed. For clinical recommendations, the supporting evidence was appraised, and the strength of each clinical recommendation was assessed, using the American College of Physicians system. The final document was organized so that each topic is introduced with a question, followed by a formal clinical recommendation. Stakeholder input was received at a national meeting, with some subsequent refinement of the clinical questions addressed in the document. Consensus was achieved for all recommendations by the task force.ResultsWe reviewed the following therapeutic categories: (i) levothyroxine therapy, (ii) non-levothyroxine-based thyroid hormone therapies, and (iii) use of thyroid hormone analogs. The second category included thyroid extracts, synthetic combination therapy, triiodothyronine therapy, and compounded thyroid hormones.ConclusionsWe concluded that levothyroxine should remain the standard of care for treating hypothyroidism. We found no consistently strong evidence for the superiority of alternative preparations (e.g., levothyroxine-liothyronine combination therapy, or thyroid extract therapy, or others) over monotherapy with levothyroxine, in improving health outcomes. Some examples of future research needs include the development of superior biomarkers of euthyroidism to supplement thyrotropin measurements, mechanistic research on serum triiodothyronine levels (including effects of age and disease status, relationship with tissue concentrations, as well as potential therapeutic targeting), and long-term outcome clinical trials testing combination therapy or thyroid extracts (including subgroup effects). Additional research is also needed to develop thyroid hormone analogs with a favorable benefit to risk profile.

Dataset Information

Liothyronine and Desiccated Thyroid Extract in the Treatment of Hypothyroidism.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets